Getting Engaged

The 2011 AGB Survey of Higher Education Governance has a special focus on board engagement. We looked at the broad range of trustee responsibilities, from academic programs to strategic planning, and learned where board members are appropriately engaged, over engaged/ micromanaging, or under engaged. We also learned what changes presidents would like to make to enhance board engagement.

Having appropriately engaged board members means the board is doing the right work and doing it well. Focused, purposeful engagement of board members provides the synergy needed to generate creative solutions, the trust needed to make tough choices, and the satisfaction needed to build commitment among board members. According to Merriam Webster, engagement means being in gear, greatly interested, and committed; the opposite of engagement makes its value even clearer--to withdraw or malfunction. I like to think of an appropriately engaged board as a well-oiled machine, with all of the parts moving in-synch.

In my experience at AGB, presidents are intrigued by the notion of a more engaged board but aren’t always sure how to encourage or help foster one.  Other presidents (a declining number, I think) approach cultivation of board members like mushroom farming (as in keep them in the dark and cover them in manure).  There is valid concern that encouraging more board activity will lead to more demands, micromanaging, and problems. I also fear an “activist” board, which I envision as a collection of individuals each with his or her personal agenda for the institution, hell-bent to achieve it; that’s not appropriate engagement.

What I’ve found is that board education is the president’s most valuable tool, and a board chair/president relationship built on trust is essential for success.  A well-informed board member will understand and respect the distinction between governing and managing much better than one that is uninformed. A well informed and effective board chair will focus the agenda on important board level work, recognize and address transgressions by board members (so the president doesn’t have to), and work hard to support achievement of the president’s goals for the institution.

I think board engagement has a nice ring to it.